Re: IIGS -> VGA: Success!

["Jim Maricondo" <jimm@NOSPAM-uranus.dti.ne.jp>]

"Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message
20020822143630.22042.00003093@mb-mv.aol.com">news:20020822143630.22042.00003093@mb-mv.aol.com...
>
> No, I think that a CRT--which doesn't have discrete "dots"--will be much
> more forgiving in displaying a digital video signal (that is, not people
and
> trees, etc.) than an LCD, which has discrete pixels and must decide
> whether a dot edge is "in" this pixel or "out".  Tiny timing variations in
> the video signal will cause marginal decisions of this sort to flip
between
> "in" and "out" and produce non-uniform edges.  (Now, if you could make
> the timing variations be on the order of half a video dot and fast, then
the
> result would be a "dithered" display, which would be stable, but just a
> little fuzzier.)

You are probably correct.  Maybe it is for that reason that the makers of
the XRGB-2 do not guarantee its results when used with an LCD display.
Unfortunately I don't have a CRT to test with!  (CRTs are getting
increasingly hard to find in Japan, where desk space is usually at a
premium!)

However, the one thing I find a bit hard to understand is how my LCD can
display 1280x1024 XVGA analog very crisply (although I usually use the DVI
input, the VGA input isn't that much worse), yet has difficutly displaying
crisp edges with Apple IIGS 320/640x200 upscanned to VGA.  I guess it is
because of the XVGA-2 having to sample the IIGS video, then reconstruct it
as VGA, and then my monitor having to sample the VGA, and reconstruct it to
LCD discrete pixels?

 -Jim